Theos-Talk Archives (September 2008 Message tt00067)

Daniel,
References you brought here don't make SR's story untrue.
CWL did not say that HPB was "GIVEN OVER TO CHELAS"
HPB generally had habit of reacting and countering something written
against her. So her statements showing dissatisfaction about SR's are
consistent with her temperament.
Mahatma KH wrote in 1888, few years after CWL letter. Even this KH
letter does not make SR-CWL theory wrong because CWL also wrote that
it was "Tibet woman" who was occupying that body most of the time
indicating this "Tibet woman" was "agent". 
I was also thinking about absence of Masters KH and M in CWL letter in
1885. CWL might be referring Master D.K. as that Adept.
>From the references you gave it can be said that Master K.H. and M.
did use HPB as agent.
Daniel, 
You tell us again and again that Masters corrected HPB's mistakes in
The Secrete Doctrine. But what happened to mistakes she obviously made
in her other writings like Isis Unveiled, Key to Theosophy, larger
number of her articles in magazines published by the TS ? Those
mistakes are still there. Daniel, why don't you warn readers of HPB's
writing that mistakes in other writings are not corrected ?

Anand Gholap



--- In theos-talk@yahoogroups.com, "danielhcaldwell"
<danielhcaldwell@...> wrote:
>
> According to T. Subba Row as reported by C. W. Leadbeater
> and apparently also believed by CWL:
> 
> ----------------------------------------------------
> "...the original H. P. Blavatsky?disappeared from earth life some 
> twenty years ago, and...a certain Adept...voluntarily took possession 
> of her body, or was placed there? [and] when ...he was frequently 
> absent from this body.?two Chelas, but little versed in occultism, 
> were selected to take the Adept's place when necessary; and as no 
> Adept or Chela can enter into a woman's body during times of illness, 
> at such times it had to be taken possession of by a terrible ill-
> tempered, ignorant old Tibet woman, in place of the Adept or Chelas.?
> the terrible old woman alone has inhabited her almost all the time?
> Still the Adept maintains his connection, in the hope, as we think, 
> to be able to complete his promulgation of the "secret doctrine" 
> through her.
> ----------------------------------------------------
> http://blavatskyarchives.com/anoncomplex.htm
> 
> So according to this explanation HPB was merely a "body" or SHELL
> used by "a certain Adept" but he was FREQUENTLY ABSENT from this shell
> and "two Chelas" BUT LITTLE VERSED IN OCCULTISM took his
> place in this shell but of late "a terrible ill-tempered, ignorant 
> old Tibet Woman" inhabited and managed the HPB shell!
> 
> Notice in the above description no mention or reference WHATSOEVER is 
> given of either Master Morya or Master Koot Hoomi or Djual Khool and 
> their supervision, direction and collaboration with HPB. 
> 
> Yet at the same time TSR and CWL was spreading this "explanation", 
> H.P. Blavatsky herself knew what Subba Row was doing.
> 
> HPB wrote:
> 
> -------------------------------------------------------
> Has he [T. Subba Row] not gravely given out to Mr. and
> Mrs. C.O. that I was henceforth "a shell deserted and abandoned by
> the Masters?"
> ------------------------------------------------------
> quoted from:
> http://www.theosociety.org/pasadena/hpb-aps/bl-42.htm
> 
> Three years later, she wrote:
> 
> ----------------------------------------------------------
> ...they have pretended that my occult knowledge had faded away during 
> my illness; that even Masters have turned away from me to them, & 
> that I was now the prey of Elementals & half-fledged chelas!
> ----------------------------------------------------------
> http://blavatskyarchives.com/hpbjrb.htm
> 
> But Mahatma Koot Hoomi in his August 1888 letter to Colonel Olcott, 
> the president and co-founder of the TS, said in clear cut language 
> the following about HPB:
> 
> "...Her fidelity to our work being constant, and her sufferings
> having come upon her thro' it, neither I nor either of my Brother
> associates will desert or supplant her....
> 
> "...this you must tell to all: -- With occult matters she has
> everything to do. We have not abandoned her; she is not 'given over
> to chelas.' She is our direct agent...."
> 
> Notice that KH places in quotation marks the words "given over to 
> chelas".
> 
> WE WILL NOT DESERT OR SUPPLANT HER
> 
> WE HAVE NOT ABANDONED HER [to a terrible ill-tempered, ignorant old 
> Tibet woman....]
> 
> SHE IS NOT "GIVEN OVER TO CHELAS" [to two Chelas, but little versed 
> in occultism...]
> 
> SHE IS OUR DIRECT AGENT.
> 
> Food for thought!!!
> 
> Daniel
> http://hpb.cc
>